I watch and like AMC shows quite abit. However if John Dolan and his crew want to hit Verizon with a huge carriage increase I say NO.

Just look how much increased carriage fees are impacting the price for FIOS TV. Just a year ago Verizon was charging around $84.99 for new ExtremeHD triple play accounts. Now they are charging $20 more for the same triple play. I know Verizon will take alot of heat in these forums if the deadline passes but I think we all should look at the bottom line which is keeping prices down.

I saw this too and freaked out but had to calm myself and give the show my full attention. I went here after the show finished to see if anyone heard about this but apparently this is new. So I went to the site and its says: AMC, IFC, SUNDANCE CH and WE.tv

These are apparently the channels that are going to be taken down. I still don't know the why though.

While watching THE WALKING DEAD tonight, I saw that Verizon may be dropping AMC channel and possibly their other affiliated channels. I hope that this doesn't happen because I love this channel. I'm a long-time customer, & would hate to have to consider taking my business to another company that would still have it... But I will.

Not in a million years would I be watching Walking Dead without a DVR. AMC should dump the commercials, then they could ask for higher carraige fee's. The only problem is, the actors would have to double their working hours

This would suck but i'd rather Verizon stand up to Rainbow media and the Dolans then just let them charge whatever they want in carriage fees. It seems because of the walking dead they think they can bully everyone into paying more. First Dish, now Verizon. I wonder who their agreement runs out with next that they'll try to bully.

If Verizon drops AMC, then I will have to switch providers. I've been, thus far, happy with my service. However, two of my favorite shows are on AMC. The Walking Dead & Hell on Wheels. And if this becomes an issue with other providers as well, then I guess I watch every thing via internet. I dont have a problem connecting my computer to my TV. Would actually save me alot of money & make my wife that we are saving. In times like these days are for people, this is how you re-pay your customers. You ask for more money & hold great shows hostage. Smart thinking, who ever thought of this.

Who cares if they get advertising revenue! I pay for my FIOS service for the channel lineup they advertised. It's a contract. If they yank the channels I paid for, I say it's time for a class action suit against Verizon and/or AMC.

Who cares if they get advertising revenue! I pay for my FIOS service for the channel lineup they advertised. It's a contract. If they yank the channels I paid for, I say it's time for a class action suit against Verizon and/or AMC.

Good luck with that, check your contract, it says not all channels will always be available.

For all those threatening to drop VZ unless they agree to AMCs new contract requirements. This is pretty standard and all video providers will run into this situation with the likes of AMC, Disney, the Broadcast Networks, etc

I watch and like AMC shows quite abit. However if John Dolan and his crew want to hit Verizon with a huge carriage increase I say NO.

Just look how much increased carriage fees are impacting the price for FIOS TV. Just a year ago Verizon was charging around $84.99 for new ExtremeHD triple play accounts. Now they are charging $20 more for the same triple play. I know Verizon will take alot of heat in these forums if the deadline passes but I think we all should look at the bottom line which is keeping prices down.

I would rather they pay more to AMC and cut what they pay ESPN. Or better yet put all the ESPN channels on a separate Sports tier. That would lower all our bills by a fair amount.

Why is it EVERY time there is one of these disputes, it's AMC vs. a cable provider? AMC almost every time. Why is that? Honestly, I hope Verizon drops them, I'll just go to a torrent website I know the next day and watch the few shows I watch on there. IFC, We, and Sundance are horrible looking cropped trash.

Everyone wants all the channels, with no ads, and no price increases. The providers dont win in these situations, and the customers lose as well.

Well, actually, I'd disagree with the first part of that. "Everyone" may want AMC (I do, at least, though I don't really care if it's gone while Walking Dead, Mad Men, and Breaking Bad all aren't airing new episodes), but a lot fewer people really want (or care about) Sundance, IFC, and We TV. What seems to happen a lot in these discussions is that the provider wants something in relation to their other channels -- placement on better tiers, HD carriage if only SD is being carried at the moment, maybe a fee increase -- and they use their one desired channel, AMC in this case, as the stick to hit the cable/satellite/fiber company with. The classic example of this, as I understand it, is ABC requiring systems to carry stuff like ESPN Classics if they want to be able to air their local ABC-owned network signal.

Time for a law that forces unbundling of any channel charging a carriage fee over 50 cents. I have no issues with the hbo pay model where you choose if you want the channel, but this new model of higher and higher carriage fee channels being included in basic plans needs to stop.

Eventually the greed of these networks will force government intervention, and this gravy train will come to a screeching halt.

Why is it EVERY time there is one of these disputes, it's AMC vs. a cable provider? AMC almost every time. Why is that? Honestly, I hope Verizon drops them, I'll just go to a torrent website I know the next day and watch the few shows I watch on there. IFC, We, and Sundance are horrible looking cropped trash.

ok agreement is up Dec 31. This is typical negotiating ploy to make the other side the bad guy. AMC wants everyone to blame Fios if on Jan 1 we don't have those 4 channels

The telco issued its own statement on Monday morning: "There is no risk of FiOS TV customers losing AMC imminently, as AMC Networks has incorrectly claimed. This is nothing more than a desperate attempt by AMCN to scare our FiOS TV customers into thinking that they will lose their programming.

"Verizon has a history of working with top programmers to reach mutually beneficial agreements that enable our customers to continue enjoying the best programming on FiOS TVs industry-leading service," the telco continued. "We continue to work hard on behalf of our customers, as we negotiate with AMC Networks to reach an agreement that is reasonable and in our customers best interest. It is unfortunate that AMCN has decided to unnecessarily publicize these discussions, but not surprising as they have a history of using their viewers as pawns in their negotiations with distributors."

Exactly, this is my point. AMC/Rainbow Media uses scare tactics in every dispute. Cablevision winds up in one of these spats with networks all the time. Connection? Chairman of the board Charles Dolan.

There is a law, it's the law of free market. As a seller, get what you can get. As a consumer, buy what you need or can afford. GOV does not need to be meddling in such trivial matters, nor (IMO) does it need to be meddling in what can be digitally shared.